The Resilience Hub was established to coordinate mental health and psychosocial support for anyone affected by the 2017 Manchester Arena terrorist attack.

To use the Hub’s mental health screening data to examine the variation in symptoms reported by children and young persons (CYP) and their parent/guardian and explore any association with time delay in post-event registration or parental distress.

CYP engaging with Hub services were separated into eight ‘admission’ groups depending on when they registered post-incident. CYP were screened for trauma, depression, and generalised and separation anxiety. Parents/guardians also completed screening measures for their own and their child’s anxiety. Baseline and follow-up scores were compared between admission groups. Parental and CYP assessments of the CYP’s anxiety score was compared with the measure of parental distress.

Almost half of CYP registered in the first 3 months of service launch, with numbers of new registrations falling during each subsequent screening cycle. Generally, there was an increase in baseline screening scores as Hub registration time increased. The Children’s Impact of Event scale score decreased by 0.11 (95% CI: −0.17, −0.05) per month, but the score for depression increased by 0.06 (95% CI: 0.03, 0.10). Longitudinal patterns in anxiety and separation were difficult to discern. Screening scores of CYP registering later reduced at a faster rate than those of the first registrants. Higher levels of parental mental distress were correlated with increased anxiety scores assigned to the CYP in relation to the anxiety score reported by the CYP themselves.

CYP who registered earlier were less symptomatic, although those registering later did show increased improvement in their symptoms, indicating that the Hub was beneficial. Parental well-being was associated with child mental distress, indicating that shared family trauma should be considered when planning care.

Psychotic disorders are severe mental health conditions frequently associated with long-term disability, reduced quality of life and premature mortality. Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) services aim to provide timely, comprehensive packages of care for people with psychotic disorders. However, it is not clear which components of EIP services contribute most to the improved outcomes they achieve.

We aimed to identify associations between specific components of EIP care and clinically significant outcomes for individuals treated for early psychosis in England.

This national retrospective cohort study of 14 874 EIP individuals examined associations between 12 components of EIP care and outcomes over a 3-year follow-up period, by linking data from the National Clinical Audit of Psychosis (NCAP) to routine health outcome data held by NHS England. The primary outcome was time to relapse, defined as psychiatric inpatient admission or referral to a crisis resolution (home treatment) team. Secondary outcomes included duration of admissions, detention under the Mental Health Act, emergency department and general hospital attendances and mortality. We conducted multilevel regression analyses incorporating demographic and service-level covariates.

Smaller care coordinator case-loads and the use of clozapine for eligible people were associated with reduced relapse risk. Physical health interventions were associated with reductions in mortality risk. Other components, such as cognitive–behavioural therapy for psychosis (CBTp), showed associations with improvements in secondary outcomes.

Smaller case-loads should be prioritised and protected in EIP service design and delivery. Initiatives to improve the uptake of clozapine should be integrated into EIP care. Other components, such as CBTp and physical health interventions, may have specific benefits for those eligible. These findings highlight impactful components of care and should guide resource allocation to optimise EIP service delivery.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on the population’s mental health, particularly for individuals with health anxiety (HA) and obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD). This is in conjunction with a significant change in accessibility of face-to-face psychological services which have had to rapidly adapt to the remote delivery of therapy.

Using a single-arm open trial design, the study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of evidence-based CBT interventions for HA and OCD delivered via a blend of online therapist consultations interspersed with self-study reading materials. A secondary aim was to evaluate remote training workshops provided to therapists.

Therapists attended three half-day remote workshops after which consecutive participants with HA or OCD were assigned to therapists for treatment. Monthly expert supervision was provided. Patients completed routine outcome measures at each session and an idiosyncratic measure of pre-occupation with COVID-19 at pre- and post-treatment.

Significant and comparable improvements were observed on measures of anxiety, depression and social adjustment from pre- to post-treatment in both the HA (n=14) and OCD (n=20) groups. Disorder-specific measures also showed significant improvements after treatment. The HA group showed greater levels of change on the COVID-19-specific questionnaire. The training workshops were well received by therapists, who valued the monthly supervision sessions.

The study provides support for the effectiveness of the online delivery of CBT for HA and OCD supported by the inclusion of additional self-study booklets.

Early intervention in psychosis (EIP) services improve outcomes for young people, but approximately 30% disengage.

To test whether a new motivational engagement intervention would prolong engagement and whether it was cost-effective.

We conducted a multicentre, single-blind, parallel-group, cluster randomised controlled trial involving 20 EIP teams at five UK National Health Service (NHS) sites. Teams were randomised using permuted blocks stratified by NHS trust. Participants were all young people (aged 14–35 years) presenting with a first episode of psychosis between May 2019 and July 2020 (N = 1027). We compared the novel Early Youth Engagement (EYE-2) intervention plus standardised EIP (sEIP) with sEIP alone. The primary outcome was time to disengagement over 12–26 months. Economic outcomes were mental health costs, societal costs and socio-occupational outcomes over 12 months. Assessors were masked to treatment allocation for primary disengagement and cost-effectiveness outcomes. Analysis followed intention-to-treat principles. The trial was registered at ISRCTN51629746.

Disengagement was low at 15.9% overall in standardised stand-alone services. The adjusted hazard ratio for EYE-2 + sEIP (n = 652) versus sEIP alone (n = 375) was 1.07 (95% CI 0.76–1.49; P = 0.713). The health economic evaluation indicated lower mental healthcare costs linked to reductions in unplanned mental healthcare with no compromise of clinical outcomes, as well as some evidence for lower societal costs and more days in education, training, employment and stable accommodation in the EYE-2 group.

We found no evidence that EYE-2 increased time to disengagement, but there was some evidence for its cost-effectiveness. This is the largest study to date reporting positive engagement, health and cost outcomes in a total EIP population sample. Limitations included high loss to follow-up for secondary outcomes and low completion of societal and socio-occupational data. COVID-19 affected fidelity and implementation. Future engagement research should target engagement to those in greatest need, including in-patients and those with socio-occupational goals.

Understanding inequalities in outcomes between demographic groups is a necessary step in addressing them in clinical care. Inequalities in treatment uptake between demographic groups may explain disparities in outcomes in people with first-episode psychosis (FEP).

To investigate disparities between broad demographic groups in symptomatic improvement in patients with FEP and their relationship to treatment uptake.

We used data from 6813 patients from the 2021–2022 National Clinical Audit of Psychosis data-set. Data were grouped by category type to obtain mean outcomes before adjustment to see whether disparities in outcomes remained after differences in treatment uptake had been accounted for. After matching, the average effect of each demographic variable in terms of outcome change was calculated. Moderator effects on specific treatments were investigated using interaction terms in a regression model.

Observational results showed that patients aged 18–24 years were less likely to improve in outcome, unless adjusted for intervention uptake. Patients classified as Black and Black British were less likely to improve in outcome (moderation effect 0.04, 95% CI 0–0.07) after adjusting for treatment take-up and demographic factors. Regression analysis showed the general positive effect of supported employment interventions in improving outcomes (coefficient −0.13, 95% CI −0.07 to −0.18, P < 0.001), and moderator analysis suggested targeting particular groups for interventions.

Inequalities in treatment uptake and psychotic symptom outcome of FEP by social and demographic factors require monitoring over time. Our analysis provides a framework for monitoring health inequalities across national clinical audits in the UK.

Terrorist incidents lead to a range of mental health outcomes for people affected, sometimes extending years after the event. Secondary stressors can exacerbate them, and social support can provide mitigation and aid recovery. There is a need to better understand distress and mitigating factors among survivors of the Manchester Arena attack in 2017.

We explored three questions. First, what experiences of distress did participants report? Second, how might secondary stressors have influenced participants’ psychosocial recoveries? Third, what part has social support played in the relationships between distress and participants’ recovery trajectories?

We conducted a cross-sectional online survey of a convenience sample of survivors of the Manchester Arena bombing (N = 84) in January 2021 (3 years 8 months post-incident), and a longitudinal study of the same participants’ scores on mental health measures over 3 years from September 2017.

Survivors’ mental well-being scores in early 2021 were significantly lower than general population norms. Longitudinal follow-up provided evidence of enduring distress. Secondary stressors, specifically disruptions to close relationships, were associated with greater post-event distress and slower recovery. We found an indirect relationship between identifying with, and receiving support from, others present at the event and mental well-being >3 years later.

The Arena attack has had an enduring impact on mental health, even in survivors who had a mild response to the event. The quality of close relationships is pivotal to long-term outcome. Constructive support from family and friends, and people with shared experiences, are key to social cure processes that facilitate coping and recovery.

An Early Intervention in Psychosis (EIP) service offers treatment in the community to people with a first episode of psychosis. EIP is meant to be given for three years; after this time, those who are well are discharged to their GP, while those with ongoing symptoms and care needs are transferred to a general community mental health team. People can become unwell at this time of change and might benefit from longer treatment with EIP. We also know that some people who are well could possibly have been discharged back to their GP earlier. The EXTEND programme aims to develop a more tailored approach to EIP services based on the needs of each individual and understand the health, social, and cost-benefits of this approach.

This qualitative study sits within a larger programme of work. Ethics and HRA approvals gained. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with health care professionals from primary and specialist care, managers and commissioners, to understand why and how decisions about duration of EIP care are made. Interviews have been transcribed and thematic analysis using principles of constant comparison is being conducted. Patient and public involvement is key to all stages of the study.

Five interviews with General Practitioners and twelve interviews with EIP healthcare professionals, managers and commissioners have been conducted. Initial analysis suggests that access to EIP services can be challenging. Initial engagement is needed before therapy can begin. Decisions about duration of care can depend upon availability of access to Community Mental Health teams. Discharge planning rarely involves communication between primary and specialist care, and this can be a difficult transition, particularly when discharge is back to primary care. The pathway back into mental health care following discharge can be difficult. Trusting relationships between service users and EIP professionals are key to the success of EIP care. Healthcare professionals would value - and in some cases are given - flexibility to extend EIP care beyond 3 years.

We have developed a model to illustrate the patient journey through the EIP service which will be presented for the first time at the conference.

This research provides a framework to understand decision-making around duration of care, discharge planning and practices, and post-discharge support for EIP service users. The next phase of the study will be interviews with service users and carers to explore their experiences of EIP services, duration of care and discharge planning.

1. (1) To assess the effectiveness of a multi-agency hoarding conference at improving understanding and confidence in working with hoarding problems.

2. (2) To explore professionals’ perceptions of improvements to multi-agency service provision.

3. (3) To explore perceptions of improvements that could be made to multi-agency service provision from people with personal experience of hoarding problems.

Much of the psychosocial care people receive after major incidents and disasters is informal and is provided by families, friends, peer groups and wider social networks. Terrorist attacks have increased in recent years. Therefore, there is a need to better understand and facilitate the informal social support given to survivors.

We addressed three questions. First, what is the nature of any informal support-seeking and provision for people who experienced the 2017 Manchester Arena terrorist attack? Second, who provided support, and what makes it helpful? Third, to what extent do support groups based on shared experience of the attack operate as springboards to recovery?

Semi-structured interviews were carried out with a purposive sample of 18 physically non-injured survivors of the Manchester Arena bombing, registered at the NHS Manchester Resilience Hub. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed.

Participants often felt constrained from sharing their feelings with friends and families, who were perceived as unable to understand their experiences. They described a variety of forms of helpful informal social support, including social validation, which was a feature of support provided by others based on shared experience. For many participants, accessing groups based on shared experience was an important factor in their coping and recovery, and was a springboard to personal growth.

We recommend that people who respond to survivors’ psychosocial and mental healthcare needs after emergencies and major incidents should facilitate interventions for survivors and their social networks that maximise the benefits of shared experience and social validation.

Distress after major incidents is widespread among survivors. The great majority do not meet the criteria for mental health disorders and rely on psychosocial care provided by their informal networks and official response services. There is a need to better understand their experiences of distress and psychosocial care needs.

The aims of our study were to enhance understanding of the experience of distress among people present at the Manchester Arena bombing in 2017, identify their experiences of psychosocial care after the incident and learn how to better deliver and target effective psychosocial care following major incidents.

We conducted a thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with 18 physically non-injured survivors of the Manchester Arena attack, who registered with the NHS Manchester Resilience Hub.

Distress was ubiquitous, with long-lasting health and social consequences. Initial reluctance to seek help from services was also common. Early and open access to authoritative sources of information and emotional support, and organised events for survivors, were viewed as helpful interventions. Inappropriate forms of psychosocial and mental healthcare were common and potent stressors that affected coping and recovery.

This paper extends our understanding of how people react to major events. Provision for the large group of people who are distressed and require psychosocial care may be inadequate after many incidents. There is a substantial agenda for developing awareness of people's needs for psychosocial interventions, and training practitioners to deliver them. The findings have substantial implications for policy and service design.

Young people with social disability and severe and complex mental health problems have poor outcomes, frequently struggling with treatment access and engagement. Outcomes may be improved by enhancing care and providing targeted psychological or psychosocial intervention.

We aimed to test the hypothesis that adding social recovery therapy (SRT) to enhanced standard care (ESC) would improve social recovery compared with ESC alone.

A pragmatic, assessor-masked, randomised controlled trial (PRODIGY: ISRCTN47998710) was conducted in three UK centres. Participants (n = 270) were aged 16–25 years, with persistent social disability, defined as under 30 hours of structured activity per week, social impairment for at least 6 months and severe and complex mental health problems. Participants were randomised to ESC alone or SRT plus ESC. SRT was an individual psychosocial therapy delivered over 9 months. The primary outcome was time spent in structured activity 15 months post-randomisation.

We randomised 132 participants to SRT plus ESC and 138 to ESC alone. Mean weekly hours in structured activity at 15 months increased by 11.1 h for SRT plus ESC (mean 22.4, s.d. = 21.4) and 16.6 h for ESC alone (mean 27.7, s.d. = 26.5). There was no significant difference between arms; treatment effect was −4.44 (95% CI −10.19 to 1.31, P = 0.13). Missingness was consistently greater in the ESC alone arm.

We found no evidence for the superiority of SRT as an adjunct to ESC. Participants in both arms made large, clinically significant improvements on all outcomes. When providing comprehensive evidence-based standard care, there are no additional gains by providing specialised SRT. Optimising standard care to ensure targeted delivery of existing interventions may further improve outcomes.

To examine whether national initiatives have led to improvements in the physical health of people with psychosis. Secondary analysis of a national audit of services for people with psychosis. Proportions of patients in ‘good health’ according to seven measures, and one composite measure derived from national standards, were compared between multiple rounds of data collection.

The proportion of patients in overall ‘good health’ under the care of ‘Early Intervention in Psychosis’ teams increased from 2014–2019, particularly for measures of smoking, alcohol and substance use. There was no overall change in the proportion of patients in overall ‘good health’ under the care of ‘Community Mental Health Teams’ from 2011–2017. However, there were improvements in alcohol use, blood glucose and lipid levels.

There have been modest improvements in the health of people with psychosis over the last nine years. Continuing efforts are required to translate these improvements into reductions in premature mortality.

Mental health policy makers require evidence-based information to optimise effective care provision based on local need, but tools are unavailable.

To develop and validate a population-level prediction model for need for early intervention in psychosis (EIP) care for first-episode psychosis (FEP) in England up to 2025, based on epidemiological evidence and demographic projections.

We used Bayesian Poisson regression to model small-area-level variation in FEP incidence for people aged 16–64 years. We compared six candidate models, validated against observed National Health Service FEP data in 2017. Our best-fitting model predicted annual incidence case-loads for EIP services in England up to 2025, for probable FEP, treatment in EIP services, initial assessment by EIP services and referral to EIP services for ‘suspected psychosis’. Forecasts were stratified by gender, age and ethnicity, at national and Clinical Commissioning Group levels.

A model with age, gender, ethnicity, small-area-level deprivation, social fragmentation and regional cannabis use provided best fit to observed new FEP cases at national and Clinical Commissioning Group levels in 2017 (predicted 8112, 95% CI 7623–8597; observed 8038, difference of 74 [0.92%]). By 2025, the model forecasted 11 067 new treated cases per annum (95% CI 10 383–11 740). For every 10 new treated cases, 21 and 23 people would be assessed by and referred to EIP services for suspected psychosis, respectively.

Our evidence-based methodology provides an accurate, validated tool to inform clinical provision of EIP services about future population need for care, based on local variation of major social determinants of psychosis.

Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) is used increasingly during resuscitation. The aim of this study was to assess whether combining POCUS and electrocardiogram (ECG) rhythm findings better predicts outcomes during cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the emergency department (ED).

We completed a health records review on ED cardiac arrest patients who underwent POCUS. Primary outcome measurements included return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC), survival to hospital admission, and survival to hospital discharge.

POCUS was performed on 180 patients; 45 patients (25.0%; 19.2%–31.8%) demonstrated cardiac activity on initial ECG, and 21 (11.7%; 7.7%–17.2%) had cardiac activity on initial POCUS; 47 patients (26.1%; 20.2%–33.0%) achieved ROSC, 18 (10.0%; 6.3%–15.3%) survived to admission, and 3 (1.7%; 0.3%–5.0%) survived to hospital discharge. As a predictor of failure to achieve ROSC, ECG had a sensitivity of 82.7% (95% CI 75.2%–88.7%) and a specificity of 46.8% (32.1%–61.9%). Overall, POCUS had a higher sensitivity of 96.2% (91.4%–98.8%) but a similar specificity of 34.0% (20.9%–49.3%). In patients with ECG-asystole, POCUS had a sensitivity of 98.18% (93.59%–99.78%) and a specificity of 16.00% (4.54%–36.08%). In patients with pulseless electrical activity, POCUS had a sensitivity of 86.96% (66.41%–97.22%) and a specificity of 54.55% (32.21%–75.61%). Similar patterns were seen for survival to admission and discharge. Only 0.8% (0.0–4.7%) of patients with ECG-asystole and standstill on POCUS survived to hospital discharge.

The absence of cardiac activity on POCUS, or on both ECG and POCUS together, better predicts negative outcomes in cardiac arrest than ECG alone. No test reliably predicted survival.

Terrorist attacks have increased globally since the late 1990s with clear evidence of psychological distress across both adults and children and young people (CYP). After the Manchester Arena terrorist attack, the Resilience Hub was established to identify people in need of psychological and psychosocial support.

To examine the severity of symptoms and impact of the programme.

The hub offers outreach, screening, clinical telephone triage and facilitation to access evidenced treatments. People were screened for trauma, depression, generalised anxiety and functioning who registered at 3, 6 and 9 months post-incident. Baseline scores were compared between screening groups (first screen at 3, 6 or 9 months) in each cohort (adult, CYP), and within groups to compare scores at 9 months.

There were significant differences in adults' baseline scores across screening groups on trauma, depression, anxiety and functioning. There were significant differences in the baseline scores of CYP across screening groups on trauma, depression, generalised anxiety and separation anxiety. Paired samples t-tests demonstrated significant differences between baseline and follow-up scores on all measures for adults in the 3-month screening group, and only depression and functioning measures for adults in the 6-month screening group. Data about CYP in the 3-month screening group, demonstrated significant differences between baseline and follow-up scores on trauma, generalised anxiety and separation anxiety.

These findings suggest people who register earlier are less symptomatic and demonstrate greater improvement across a range of psychological measures. Further longitudinal research is necessary to understand changes over time.

None.

The SUPEREDEN3 study, a phase II randomized controlled trial, suggests that social recovery therapy (SRT) is useful in improving functional outcomes in people with first episode psychosis. SRT incorporates cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) techniques with case management and employment support, and therefore has a different emphasis to traditional CBT for psychosis, requiring a new adherence tool.

This paper describes the SRT adherence checklist and content of the therapy delivered in the SUPEREDEN3 trial, outlining the frequency of SRT techniques and proportion of participants who received a full therapy dose. It was hypothesized that behavioural techniques would be used frequently, consistent with the behavioural emphasis of SRT.

Research therapists completed an adherence checklist after each therapy session, endorsing elements of SRT present. Data from 1236 therapy sessions were reviewed to determine whether participants received full, partial or no therapy dose.

Of the 75 participants randomized to receive SRT, 57.3% received a full dose, 24% a partial dose, and 18.7% received no dose. Behavioural techniques were endorsed in 50.5% of sessions, with cognitive techniques endorsed in 34.9% of sessions.

This report describes an adherence checklist which should be used when delivering SRT in both research and clinical practice. As hypothesized, behavioural techniques were a prominent feature of the SRT delivered in SUPEREDEN3, consistent with the behavioural emphasis of the approach. The use of this adherence tool would be considered essential for anyone delivering SRT looking to ensure adherence to the model.